|
|
Post by bzcat on Jul 19, 2018 15:40:33 GMT -8
Inglewood is considering an APM to connect the Downtown Inglewood Station to the NFL Stadium and the entertainment/retail zone that is part of the development. Urbanized has all the details: urbanize.la/post/inglewood-considers-people-mover-connect-crenshaw-line-nfl-stadium Not a bad idea in general and I understand the choice for fully automated operation for a relatively short line... but I have to say it is not the most logical use of grade separation. This kind of corridor is better served by a streetcar running at grade. Here is all the reasons why: 1. Downtown Inglewood station is an at grade station at Florence/La Brea. It will not be an easy transition to an elevated APM station across the street. A more user friendly design will be to have a parallel at grade street car station next to the Metro station. 2. Market Street between Regent and Manchester (Downtown Inglewood) is a narrow 1 lane street with wide sidewalks and traditional "downtown" setting. It is perfect for conversion to a car-free pedestrian plaza with at grade street car running in the middle. Putting an elevated train over this street is a huge planning mistake and will ruin the pedestrian oriented setting. 3. Manchester and Prairie are both super wide streets that can easily accommodate a center-running street car line. This is an opportunity to redesign these streets to be community oriented rather than a thoroughfare for commuters. Putting an elevated train on these streets is again, a missed opportunity. I think the best design here is to use a center running streetcar with a select few grade separation at major intersection. This is one of the free times that a fully grade separated line doesn't make any sense. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jul 20, 2018 9:50:42 GMT -8
All good arguments. I think the city needs to get clear about the purpose of the line. They seem to want to serve the forum/stadium area. But they also want to make the line a community resource for daily use for commuters and shoppers, even though they provide no station directly in the area they say they want to revitalize - Downtown Inglewood. This plan would only hurt Market Street, I think, with no benefit to it. If they really want to help DT Inglewood, I agree they should consider a trolley and pedestrian promenade. The full report is here. They actually studied four options: - Alternative A: Start at Inglewood/La Brea Metro station, and travel down Market, Manchester and Prairie.
- Alternative B: Start at Fairview Heights Metro station, and travel down Florence and Prairie.
- Alternative C: Start at 96th Street Metro station, and travel down Arbor Vitae and Prairie.
- Alternative D: Start at 96th Street Metro station, and travel down Century and Prairie.
They chose Alternative A. It is the shortest and cheapest. But again, it will probably have a harmful effect on DT Inglewood. (The report claims that this is the only option which attempts to meet community objectives.)
To me, Alternative B is better, because it is less disruptive to their downtown. That second option has a clear purpose (get to the sports/entertainment district), making it more straightforward for riders. But the report claims this option could negatively impact the cemetery. (I ask: how?)
Alternatives C and D are good too. These are the only two options which would connect with multiple other services (the Crenshaw/Green Line, the South Bay Line, and the LAX APM). Unfortunately, these options would require an expensive and complicated flyover at I-405, which per the report, it looks like the city doesn't want to have to deal with. |
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jul 20, 2018 10:28:33 GMT -8
Alternative A as is will really ruin Downtown... ironic outcome for a transit project.
Alternative A as a streetcar and more stops (including in Downtown) will be a huge asset for Inglewood, connecting "old town" (Downtown) with "new town" (stadium entertainment district)
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Nov 9, 2019 14:33:25 GMT -8
James Butts, current Metro Chair and Inglewood Mayor, is pushing for the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to request moving Measure R highway funds to the transit fund to fund this project and perhaps a Crenshaw Line grade separation for Centinela.
|
|
|
|
Post by thanks4goingmetro on Nov 12, 2019 9:12:22 GMT -8
Ruin downtown Inglewood? The Florence/LaBrea (Downtown Inglewood) station is walking distance to downtown Inglewood, like less than 1000 feet! Why would any able-bodied person wait for a transfer to go walking distance?
Also, if something is automated like a people mover it has to be grade separated like any airport APM or the original intentions for the I-105 Green Line. I’m not aware of any at-grade/street running trams that are automated.
|
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on Nov 13, 2019 17:24:35 GMT -8
Option C.... Gawd, I remember poking fun at this not too long ago! So if Inglewood is that motivated now, why not simply bite the bullet and take on the "costly" I-405 flyover (something "costly" is going to come up in this project anyways, I can practically guarantee it). On non-game days, I'm visualizing an airport pick-up/drop-off zone on Prairie Av./Arbor Vitae St. or Prairie Av./Century Bl. (depending upon whether they were to pick option C or D.)
Regardless of the direction this project goes, everything will be OK, so long as the word "monorail" is not suddenly brought up.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Apr 21, 2020 14:59:18 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by coasterfreak18 on Apr 22, 2020 2:53:10 GMT -8
Thanks for the update. Is there any indication that this people mover will be built as the same type of system as the LAX APM, so that it can one day become one big system? Assuming it is one day extended to the Aviation/96th Street Station. It sure would be some good planning. |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Apr 22, 2020 11:39:37 GMT -8
Thanks for the update. Is there any indication that this people mover will be built as the same type of system as the LAX APM, so that it can one day become one big system? Assuming it is one day extended to the Aviation/96th Street Station. It sure would be some good planning. It seems that many automated people mover systems in the US are using the same system, so that is likely. But I've also read that there are restrictions on using the LAX people mover for non-airport services, because it is paid for by things such as the passenger facility charge that is charged to every air ticket. |
|
|
|
Post by joquitter on Apr 22, 2020 11:54:51 GMT -8
Does anyone know the projected price tag for the Inglewood People Mover?
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Apr 22, 2020 19:51:42 GMT -8
Does anyone know the projected price tag for the Inglewood People Mover? It’s around $1 billion, according to the award report. |
|
|
|
Post by usmc1401 on Sept 17, 2021 14:12:14 GMT -8
Ground was broken today 09/17/2021 on the new Clipper's basketball arena in Inglewood CA. Inglewood should now look at a light rail line down Prairie between the Crenshaw line and the Green line. This would speed up the crowds coming and going to all three venues in Inglewood from all directions.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 17, 2021 16:37:20 GMT -8
Ground was broken today 09/17/2021 on the new Clipper's basketball arena in Inglewood CA. Inglewood should now look at a light rail line down Prairie between the Crenshaw line and the Green line. This would speed up the crowds coming and going to all three venues in Inglewood from all directions. That stadium was already planned when they envisioned the monorail. Personally I'm hoping that a way is somehow found to extend the people mover from the LAX rental car structure. That seems like it would be the most efficient operationally and be of the best way to get the most riders to the games and entertainment over the long term. |
|
|
|
Post by brady12 on Sept 19, 2021 11:12:54 GMT -8
There is ENORMOUS missed opportunity here. A major development surrounding probably the stadium in America and the best arena in America … and the transit is going to be PUTRID.
The Sepulveda line is planned to end at LAX. That’s a mistake. That line should go one stop further to an underground mega station halfway between SoFi and InTuiTDome.
In the meantime the people mover should be connected to the LAX people mover. With the LAX stops, Intuit, 2 SOFi stops, 1 Forum stop . And connect with as many metro stations as possible.
The lack of planning for all this has been just a comedy of errors
You just simply can’t have unreal facilities in the second largest city in the nation and not have quality rail transit right at the doorstep of the venues.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 19, 2021 14:56:18 GMT -8
There is ENORMOUS missed opportunity here. A major development surrounding probably the stadium in America and the best arena in America … and the transit is going to be PUTRID. The Sepulveda line is planned to end at LAX. That’s a mistake. That line should go one stop further to an underground mega station halfway between SoFi and InTuiTDome. In the meantime the people mover should be connected to the LAX people mover. With the LAX stops, Intuit, 2 SOFi stops, 1 Forum stop . And connect with as many metro stations as possible. The lack of planning for all this has been just a comedy of errors You just simply can’t have unreal facilities in the second largest city in the nation and not have quality rail transit right at the doorstep of the venues. I couldn't disagree more. The lack of planning was by two billionaires - two of the richest men in the world - that decided to build their stadiums in a place where no rail transit was planned. As it is, both the city of Inglewood and the County of Los Angeles are bending over backwards to move those billionaires to the very front of the line for new transit. I think that there's a very real chance, maybe more than 50%, that the Sepulveda line will be monorail and that it will be extended to serve the stadium area. |
|
|
|
Post by brady12 on Sept 20, 2021 2:43:26 GMT -8
There is ENORMOUS missed opportunity here. A major development surrounding probably the stadium in America and the best arena in America … and the transit is going to be PUTRID. The Sepulveda line is planned to end at LAX. That’s a mistake. That line should go one stop further to an underground mega station halfway between SoFi and InTuiTDome. In the meantime the people mover should be connected to the LAX people mover. With the LAX stops, Intuit, 2 SOFi stops, 1 Forum stop . And connect with as many metro stations as possible. The lack of planning for all this has been just a comedy of errors You just simply can’t have unreal facilities in the second largest city in the nation and not have quality rail transit right at the doorstep of the venues. I couldn't disagree more. The lack of planning was by two billionaires - two of the richest men in the world - that decided to build their stadiums in a place where no rail transit was planned. As it is, both the city of Inglewood and the County of Los Angeles are bending over backwards to move those billionaires to the very front of the line for new transit. I think that there's a very real chance, maybe more than 50%, that the Sepulveda line will be monorail and that it will be extended to serve the stadium area. That’s a fair point but where could they have built that had quality transit right now? Ballmer couldn’t build downtown that makes no sense. I don’t think there’s anywhere on the Westside he could’ve built? As for SoFi… I’m not sure where that could’ve gone either. And with all that said - this may sound dramatic - but if the Sepulveda line ends up monorail - it will be a death blow for Los Angeles transit. If that project was done right it would change everything for the better - going Monorail would be cataclysmic. HRT and have it go from as deep into the valley as possible to a spot half way between SoFi and the arena. It would end up being one of the most riden lines in America for sure. (id really like it to end one stop after that on Vermont (to eventually connect with a future Red Line extension but I know that’s out of the question) |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 20, 2021 20:03:22 GMT -8
I couldn't disagree more. The lack of planning was by two billionaires - two of the richest men in the world - that decided to build their stadiums in a place where no rail transit was planned. As it is, both the city of Inglewood and the County of Los Angeles are bending over backwards to move those billionaires to the very front of the line for new transit. I think that there's a very real chance, maybe more than 50%, that the Sepulveda line will be monorail and that it will be extended to serve the stadium area. That’s a fair point but where could they have built that had quality transit right now? Ballmer couldn’t build downtown that makes no sense. I don’t think there’s anywhere on the Westside he could’ve built? As for SoFi… I’m not sure where that could’ve gone either. And with all that said - this may sound dramatic - but if the Sepulveda line ends up monorail - it will be a death blow for Los Angeles transit. If that project was done right it would change everything for the better - going Monorail would be cataclysmic. HRT and have it go from as deep into the valley as possible to a spot half way between SoFi and the arena. It would end up being one of the most riden lines in America for sure. (id really like it to end one stop after that on Vermont (to eventually connect with a future Red Line extension but I know that’s out of the question)A basketball stadium only needs to 5-8 acres. There are multiple places within walking distance of every rail line where that could be built. There are locations near the downtown Inglewood station that could fit a basketball stadium. A football stadium is harder, but it's use is limited. It's taken decades to get transit to LAX. How much longer would it have taken were LAX only open 20-30 days per year like a football stadium? |
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Sept 21, 2021 15:08:45 GMT -8
That’s a fair point but where could they have built that had quality transit right now? Ballmer couldn’t build downtown that makes no sense. I don’t think there’s anywhere on the Westside he could’ve built? As for SoFi… I’m not sure where that could’ve gone either. And with all that said - this may sound dramatic - but if the Sepulveda line ends up monorail - it will be a death blow for Los Angeles transit. If that project was done right it would change everything for the better - going Monorail would be cataclysmic. HRT and have it go from as deep into the valley as possible to a spot half way between SoFi and the arena. It would end up being one of the most riden lines in America for sure. (id really like it to end one stop after that on Vermont (to eventually connect with a future Red Line extension but I know that’s out of the question)A basketball stadium only needs to 5-8 acres. There are multiple places within walking distance of every rail line where that could be built. There are locations near the downtown Inglewood station that could fit a basketball stadium. A football stadium is harder, but it's use is limited. It's taken decades to get transit to LAX. How much longer would it have taken were LAX only open 20-30 days per year like a football stadium? No way can you put an arena on 5 acres. Galen Center, which is half the size of this arena is on over 6 acres. Plus the Clippers are including their offices and training facility here, which is why they need 28 acres for the project. Plus you need many more acres for parking, which this arena can share with SoFi Stadium and the Forum. That just isn't available hardly anywhere in LA. The Forum was built on the site of the Inglewood Golf Course and Staples Center was built where the North Hall of the LA Convention Center was. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 22, 2021 8:39:52 GMT -8
No way can you put an arena on 5 acres. Galen Center, which is half the size of this arena is on over 6 acres. Plus the Clippers are including their offices and training facility here, which is why they need 28 acres for the project. Plus you need many more acres for parking, which this arena can share with SoFi Stadium and the Forum. That just isn't available hardly anywhere in LA. The Forum was built on the site of the Inglewood Golf Course and Staples Center was built where the North Hall of the LA Convention Center was. Nope. I looked at the footprints of several NBA stadiums before my response to brady12 and 5-8 acres is certainly doable for an arena in an urban setting as opposed to a suburban setting. The new Boston Garden was able to fit both the stadium and a parking garage on less than 5 acres. And the Clippers didn't "need" 28 acres. That was a choice that they made to have their practice facility at the same location. It's certainly not uncommon to have such facilities separate from the arena. I think that it's actually unusual for that to be the case. I also disagree that you need "many more acres for parking". That again is a choice. A choice that many NBA teams decided not to have. Look again at Boston Garden. Look at Target Center in Minneapolis. They fit their stadium on 5 acres. Look at Orlando for goodness sake. If Orlando can fit their arena plus parking on 10 acres, the Clippers can't do the same? Yeah, they can. They just chose not to. I have no problem with their choice, but I don't think that taxpayers should necessarily pay for the choice that they made. |
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Sept 22, 2021 10:12:53 GMT -8
No way can you put an arena on 5 acres. Galen Center, which is half the size of this arena is on over 6 acres. Plus the Clippers are including their offices and training facility here, which is why they need 28 acres for the project. Plus you need many more acres for parking, which this arena can share with SoFi Stadium and the Forum. That just isn't available hardly anywhere in LA. The Forum was built on the site of the Inglewood Golf Course and Staples Center was built where the North Hall of the LA Convention Center was. Nope. I looked at the footprints of several NBA stadiums before my response to brady12 and 5-8 acres is certainly doable for an arena in an urban setting as opposed to a suburban setting. The new Boston Garden was able to fit both the stadium and a parking garage on less than 5 acres. And the Clippers didn't "need" 28 acres. That was a choice that they made to have their practice facility at the same location. It's certainly not uncommon to have such facilities separate from the arena. I think that it's actually unusual for that to be the case. I also disagree that you need "many more acres for parking". That again is a choice. A choice that many NBA teams decided not to have. Look again at Boston Garden. Look at Target Center in Minneapolis. They fit their stadium on 5 acres. Look at Orlando for goodness sake. If Orlando can fit their arena plus parking on 10 acres, the Clippers can't do the same? Yeah, they can. They just chose not to. I have no problem with their choice, but I don't think that taxpayers should necessarily pay for the choice that they made. Arenas like Target Center and Boston Garden have many parking garages and other parking options surrounding them. Also, these two arenas are over 25 years old and already outdated and not up to 21st century modern standards. In LA, you'd have people parking in neighborhoods in most cases, which is a non-starter. Even Staples Center, which is right Downtown, people park all over the place and few take transit. Maybe 300-400 people taking transit out of a 19,000 seat arena. Inglewood recently went to permit parking throughout all residential neighborhoods so without all those acres of parking for SoFi, the Forum and the Intuit Dome, these stadiums wouldn't be viable. There would be very few other areas in LA which could accommodate an arena like this. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 22, 2021 15:55:11 GMT -8
Nope. I looked at the footprints of several NBA stadiums before my response to brady12 and 5-8 acres is certainly doable for an arena in an urban setting as opposed to a suburban setting. The new Boston Garden was able to fit both the stadium and a parking garage on less than 5 acres. And the Clippers didn't "need" 28 acres. That was a choice that they made to have their practice facility at the same location. It's certainly not uncommon to have such facilities separate from the arena. I think that it's actually unusual for that to be the case. I also disagree that you need "many more acres for parking". That again is a choice. A choice that many NBA teams decided not to have. Look again at Boston Garden. Look at Target Center in Minneapolis. They fit their stadium on 5 acres. Look at Orlando for goodness sake. If Orlando can fit their arena plus parking on 10 acres, the Clippers can't do the same? Yeah, they can. They just chose not to. I have no problem with their choice, but I don't think that taxpayers should necessarily pay for the choice that they made. Arenas like Target Center and Boston Garden have many parking garages and other parking options surrounding them. Also, these two arenas are over 25 years old and already outdated and not up to 21st century modern standards. In LA, you'd have people parking in neighborhoods in most cases, which is a non-starter. Even Staples Center, which is right Downtown, people park all over the place and few take transit. Maybe 300-400 people taking transit out of a 19,000 seat arena. Inglewood recently went to permit parking throughout all residential neighborhoods so without all those acres of parking for SoFi, the Forum and the Intuit Dome, these stadiums wouldn't be viable. There would be very few other areas in LA which could accommodate an arena like this. My position is that we shouldn't move billionaires to the front of the line for transit when they have nearly unlimited resources for other options. If you really think that no one is going to take transit to the games, why on earth are you disagreeing? I certainly have no problem with him building a stadium in Inglewood. He can have 1,000 acres of parking, just don't ask taxpayers to subsidize it. |
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Sept 22, 2021 17:49:45 GMT -8
Arenas like Target Center and Boston Garden have many parking garages and other parking options surrounding them. Also, these two arenas are over 25 years old and already outdated and not up to 21st century modern standards. In LA, you'd have people parking in neighborhoods in most cases, which is a non-starter. Even Staples Center, which is right Downtown, people park all over the place and few take transit. Maybe 300-400 people taking transit out of a 19,000 seat arena. Inglewood recently went to permit parking throughout all residential neighborhoods so without all those acres of parking for SoFi, the Forum and the Intuit Dome, these stadiums wouldn't be viable. There would be very few other areas in LA which could accommodate an arena like this. My position is that we shouldn't move billionaires to the front of the line for transit when they have nearly unlimited resources for other options. If you really think that no one is going to take transit to the games, why on earth are you disagreeing? I certainly have no problem with him building a stadium in Inglewood. He can have 1,000 acres of parking, just don't ask taxpayers to subsidize it. Who said Kroenke or Ballmer asked taxpayers to build a people mover? SoFi broke ground well before any discussion of a people mover was ever mentioned and opened over a year ago. A people mover will take many years to come to fruition. For Ballmer, the people mover is even less important. Concerts and basketball games end at 10:00 or 11:00 pm. Not many people are going to want to jump on a crowded people mover and then get on the Crenshaw Line in high crime South LA at that time of night, especially with Metro’s 20 minute headways and terrible transfer at Expo. I don’t think Ballmer really cares one way or another about the people mover. His arena is getting built either way and it won’t add much to the experience for the average attendee. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 23, 2021 5:46:46 GMT -8
My position is that we shouldn't move billionaires to the front of the line for transit when they have nearly unlimited resources for other options. If you really think that no one is going to take transit to the games, why on earth are you disagreeing? I certainly have no problem with him building a stadium in Inglewood. He can have 1,000 acres of parking, just don't ask taxpayers to subsidize it. Who said Kroenke or Ballmer asked taxpayers to build a people mover? SoFi broke ground well before any discussion of a people mover was ever mentioned and opened over a year ago. A people mover will take many years to come to fruition. For Ballmer, the people mover is even less important. Concerts and basketball games end at 10:00 or 11:00 pm. Not many people are going to want to jump on a crowded people mover and then get on the Crenshaw Line in high crime South LA at that time of night, especially with Metro’s 20 minute headways and terrible transfer at Expo. I don’t think Ballmer really cares one way or another about the people mover. His arena is getting built either way and it won’t add much to the experience for the average attendee. Ok. So you’re “no” on the people mover? I can’t imagine why you would be for it if you believe that the owners don’t want it and fans won’t use it. I lived in Inglewood right by the stadium when it was proposed and construction kicked off. I don’t know who had the idea for a people mover, but I’m pretty sure that it wasn’t Inglewood residents because I was at the meetings. I can only imagine that it was the result of discussions between the city and the property owners as it’s stated purpose is to serve their properties. Your take that the owners actually don’t want it or didn’t ask for it strains credibility. I disagree with you on whether fans would use it. I went to the Rams-Chargers preseason game and thousands of fans took bus shuttles from the green line. Many more than that would use a people mover right to the stadium. Not enough overall to justify building it ahead of other areas of need though. I don’t know how many would use a people mover to the clippers but my guess is 5-10% of the crowd. Basketball games typically end closer to 930pm than 10 or 11 pm. They start at 730pm and have 48 min of playing time. Counting breaks they’re about 2 hours. |
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Sept 23, 2021 11:50:27 GMT -8
Who said Kroenke or Ballmer asked taxpayers to build a people mover? SoFi broke ground well before any discussion of a people mover was ever mentioned and opened over a year ago. A people mover will take many years to come to fruition. For Ballmer, the people mover is even less important. Concerts and basketball games end at 10:00 or 11:00 pm. Not many people are going to want to jump on a crowded people mover and then get on the Crenshaw Line in high crime South LA at that time of night, especially with Metro’s 20 minute headways and terrible transfer at Expo. I don’t think Ballmer really cares one way or another about the people mover. His arena is getting built either way and it won’t add much to the experience for the average attendee. Ok. So you’re “no” on the people mover? I can’t imagine why you would be for it if you believe that the owners don’t want it and fans won’t use it. I lived in Inglewood right by the stadium when it was proposed and construction kicked off. I don’t know who had the idea for a people mover, but I’m pretty sure that it wasn’t Inglewood residents because I was at the meetings. I can only imagine that it was the result of discussions between the city and the property owners as it’s stated purpose is to serve their properties. Your take that the owners actually don’t want it or didn’t ask for it strains credibility. I disagree with you on whether fans would use it. I went to the Rams-Chargers preseason game and thousands of fans took bus shuttles from the green line. Many more than that would use a people mover right to the stadium. Not enough overall to justify building it ahead of other areas of need though. I don’t know how many would use a people mover to the clippers but my guess is 5-10% of the crowd. Basketball games typically end closer to 930pm than 10 or 11 pm. They start at 730pm and have 48 min of playing time. Counting breaks they’re about 2 hours. Since I don’t live in Inglewood and am not paying for it, I am really agnostic on it. I’m generally pro-transit of course, so I like to see transit get built in general, but can see why residents of Inglewood would not be too happy about this. Even if Metro contributes a little money, I think it is better money spent than on say the $200M being spent on the Centinela grade separation for the Crenshaw Line. Mayor Butts is really the one pushing this. You could say he is getting pressure from Kroenke, Ballmer, Spanos and Stockbridge, the developers of the retail, restaurants and office of Hollywood Park, but who knows. SoFi is going to be open for quite a few years before the people mover would open in the most optimistic of scenarios. I agree football games at SoFi will get a lot of use on the People Mover. However, I strongly disagree on the basketball arena. Staples gets less than 5% usage on transit now and that is in area with much better transit than this arena will be. The Crenshaw Line will just be a secondary line at best. I take Expo to Staples myself and if you just miss the train and have to wait for 20 minutes you pretty much question why you didn’t just drive as you can be on the Westside in those 20 min. |
|
|
|
Post by brady12 on Sept 24, 2021 11:37:40 GMT -8
Ok. So you’re “no” on the people mover? I can’t imagine why you would be for it if you believe that the owners don’t want it and fans won’t use it. I lived in Inglewood right by the stadium when it was proposed and construction kicked off. I don’t know who had the idea for a people mover, but I’m pretty sure that it wasn’t Inglewood residents because I was at the meetings. I can only imagine that it was the result of discussions between the city and the property owners as it’s stated purpose is to serve their properties. Your take that the owners actually don’t want it or didn’t ask for it strains credibility. I disagree with you on whether fans would use it. I went to the Rams-Chargers preseason game and thousands of fans took bus shuttles from the green line. Many more than that would use a people mover right to the stadium. Not enough overall to justify building it ahead of other areas of need though. I don’t know how many would use a people mover to the clippers but my guess is 5-10% of the crowd. Basketball games typically end closer to 930pm than 10 or 11 pm. They start at 730pm and have 48 min of playing time. Counting breaks they’re about 2 hours. Since I don’t live in Inglewood and am not paying for it, I am really agnostic on it. I’m generally pro-transit of course, so I like to see transit get built in general, but can see why residents of Inglewood would not be too happy about this. Even if Metro contributes a little money, I think it is better money spent than on say the $200M being spent on the Centinela grade separation for the Crenshaw Line. Mayor Butts is really the one pushing this. You could say he is getting pressure from Kroenke, Ballmer, Spanos and Stockbridge, the developers of the retail, restaurants and office of Hollywood Park, but who knows. SoFi is going to be open for quite a few years before the people mover would open in the most optimistic of scenarios. I agree football games at SoFi will get a lot of use on the People Mover. However, I strongly disagree on the basketball arena. Staples gets less than 5% usage on transit now and that is in area with much better transit than this arena will be. The Crenshaw Line will just be a secondary line at best. I take Expo to Staples myself and if you just miss the train and have to wait for 20 minutes you pretty much question why you didn’t just drive as you can be on the Westside in those 20 min. I think you’re missing the boat on the usage question. Both for the people mover and for Staples. The REASON there is such low usage at Staples? Is Metro itself. For one it’s headways are atrocious. For two the network is brutal. It currently only goes a few selective places.’it doesn’t bring enough people close enough to there doorstep or even to their neighborhood. A. If you had a station at Staples that was big enough to accommodate a large crowd, if it wasn’t in the middle of the street and was actually a modern rail mass transit station that a major metro-area deserves……. B. If headways for Metro weren’t every 20 minutes before and after a game and we’re actually every 2-3 minutes for the 2 hours leading into the game and 2 hours after the game C. If the network itself wasn’t a train wreck making it so so terribly inconvenient to ride - meaning HIDEOUS transfers. MANY areas where the lines aren’t even grade separated. I mean take this arrangement for instance… you want people to get on a line where they have to get off Expo, cross the street and go downstairs and back into the fair gates to get on Crenshaw….then after 3 nice new subway stops the line becomes partially NON-grade separated. Then people are supposed to get it off and then get on a crammed people mover …?!?!?!? PATHETIC.D. If the network went more places: Deep into the valley. All the way down Vermont. WSAB. If Crenshaw North was built. If the Sepulveda line was built. If the Green Line connected to ML at Norwalk. If there was LRT to Glendale. If there was rail on SM Blvd or rail to the east side….. THEN maybe Angelinos would get more in the habit of using the system and it would become more common place for everyone to use mass transit to concerts and sporting events like they do in New York, Boston, DC, Philly and Chicago. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 24, 2021 15:56:14 GMT -8
Ok. So you’re “no” on the people mover? I can’t imagine why you would be for it if you believe that the owners don’t want it and fans won’t use it. I lived in Inglewood right by the stadium when it was proposed and construction kicked off. I don’t know who had the idea for a people mover, but I’m pretty sure that it wasn’t Inglewood residents because I was at the meetings. I can only imagine that it was the result of discussions between the city and the property owners as it’s stated purpose is to serve their properties. Your take that the owners actually don’t want it or didn’t ask for it strains credibility. I disagree with you on whether fans would use it. I went to the Rams-Chargers preseason game and thousands of fans took bus shuttles from the green line. Many more than that would use a people mover right to the stadium. Not enough overall to justify building it ahead of other areas of need though. I don’t know how many would use a people mover to the clippers but my guess is 5-10% of the crowd. Basketball games typically end closer to 930pm than 10 or 11 pm. They start at 730pm and have 48 min of playing time. Counting breaks they’re about 2 hours. Since I don’t live in Inglewood and am not paying for it, I am really agnostic on it. I’m generally pro-transit of course, so I like to see transit get built in general, but can see why residents of Inglewood would not be too happy about this. Even if Metro contributes a little money, I think it is better money spent than on say the $200M being spent on the Centinela grade separation for the Crenshaw Line. Mayor Butts is really the one pushing this. You could say he is getting pressure from Kroenke, Ballmer, Spanos and Stockbridge, the developers of the retail, restaurants and office of Hollywood Park, but who knows. SoFi is going to be open for quite a few years before the people mover would open in the most optimistic of scenarios. I agree football games at SoFi will get a lot of use on the People Mover. However, I strongly disagree on the basketball arena. Staples gets less than 5% usage on transit now and that is in area with much better transit than this arena will be. The Crenshaw Line will just be a secondary line at best. I take Expo to Staples myself and if you just miss the train and have to wait for 20 minutes you pretty much question why you didn’t just drive as you can be on the Westside in those 20 min. Inglewood property owners will likely be asked to pay for part of it, but most of the money will come from other county, state, and federal sources. So it's using money that should be spent on transit elsewhere in LA. So yeah, I care about that. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 24, 2021 16:01:11 GMT -8
Since I don’t live in Inglewood and am not paying for it, I am really agnostic on it. I’m generally pro-transit of course, so I like to see transit get built in general, but can see why residents of Inglewood would not be too happy about this. Even if Metro contributes a little money, I think it is better money spent than on say the $200M being spent on the Centinela grade separation for the Crenshaw Line. Mayor Butts is really the one pushing this. You could say he is getting pressure from Kroenke, Ballmer, Spanos and Stockbridge, the developers of the retail, restaurants and office of Hollywood Park, but who knows. SoFi is going to be open for quite a few years before the people mover would open in the most optimistic of scenarios. I agree football games at SoFi will get a lot of use on the People Mover. However, I strongly disagree on the basketball arena. Staples gets less than 5% usage on transit now and that is in area with much better transit than this arena will be. The Crenshaw Line will just be a secondary line at best. I take Expo to Staples myself and if you just miss the train and have to wait for 20 minutes you pretty much question why you didn’t just drive as you can be on the Westside in those 20 min. I think you’re missing the boat on the usage question. Both for the people mover and for Staples. The REASON there is such low usage at Staples? Is Metro itself. For one it’s headways are atrocious. For two the network is brutal. It currently only goes a few selective places.’it doesn’t bring enough people close enough to there doorstep or even to their neighborhood. A. If you had a station at Staples that was big enough to accommodate a large crowd, if it wasn’t in the middle of the street and was actually a modern rail mass transit station that a major metro-area deserves……. B. If headways for Metro weren’t every 20 minutes before and after a game and we’re actually every 2-3 minutes for the 2 hours leading into the game and 2 hours after the game C. If the network itself wasn’t a train wreck making it so so terribly inconvenient to ride - meaning HIDEOUS transfers. MANY areas where the lines aren’t even grade separated. I mean take this arrangement for instance… you want people to get on a line where they have to get off Expo, cross the street and go downstairs and back into the fair gates to get on Crenshaw….then after 3 nice new subway stops the line becomes partially NON-grade separated. Then people are supposed to get it off and then get on a crammed people mover …?!?!?!? PATHETIC.D. If the network went more places: Deep into the valley. All the way down Vermont. WSAB. If Crenshaw North was built. If the Sepulveda line was built. If the Green Line connected to ML at Norwalk. If there was LRT to Glendale. If there was rail on SM Blvd or rail to the east side….. THEN maybe Angelinos would get more in the habit of using the system and it would become more common place for everyone to use mass transit to concerts and sporting events like they do in New York, Boston, DC, Philly and Chicago. He's saying that headways are every 20 min after the game. Headways are every 12 min before the game, which isn't bad. Overall I think that we should get used to long headways. I hate to be pessimistic, but my take is that the metro board wants metro to be the cheapest/free-est public rail system. They don't necessarily want it to be the best. I doubt that we ever see world-class headways on metro, except for maybe the P3 projects that will be run by private companies. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 24, 2021 16:06:51 GMT -8
I drove by the APM today and the terminal station above the "Rent-A-Car" facility (who came up with that?) is quite far along. As far as I could see from ground level west of the structure, it doesn't look like there is currently a physical obstacle to extending it East. This might be the best/cheapest option for a people mover, but it doesn't serve Inglewood very well aside from the stadium area.
|
|
|
|
Post by andert on Sept 24, 2021 16:36:34 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Sept 24, 2021 19:15:35 GMT -8
I think you’re missing the boat on the usage question. Both for the people mover and for Staples. The REASON there is such low usage at Staples? Is Metro itself. For one it’s headways are atrocious. For two the network is brutal. It currently only goes a few selective places.’it doesn’t bring enough people close enough to there doorstep or even to their neighborhood. A. If you had a station at Staples that was big enough to accommodate a large crowd, if it wasn’t in the middle of the street and was actually a modern rail mass transit station that a major metro-area deserves……. B. If headways for Metro weren’t every 20 minutes before and after a game and we’re actually every 2-3 minutes for the 2 hours leading into the game and 2 hours after the game C. If the network itself wasn’t a train wreck making it so so terribly inconvenient to ride - meaning HIDEOUS transfers. MANY areas where the lines aren’t even grade separated. I mean take this arrangement for instance… you want people to get on a line where they have to get off Expo, cross the street and go downstairs and back into the fair gates to get on Crenshaw….then after 3 nice new subway stops the line becomes partially NON-grade separated. Then people are supposed to get it off and then get on a crammed people mover …?!?!?!? PATHETIC.D. If the network went more places: Deep into the valley. All the way down Vermont. WSAB. If Crenshaw North was built. If the Sepulveda line was built. If the Green Line connected to ML at Norwalk. If there was LRT to Glendale. If there was rail on SM Blvd or rail to the east side….. THEN maybe Angelinos would get more in the habit of using the system and it would become more common place for everyone to use mass transit to concerts and sporting events like they do in New York, Boston, DC, Philly and Chicago. He's saying that headways are every 20 min after the game. Headways are every 12 min before the game, which isn't bad. Overall I think that we should get used to long headways. I hate to be pessimistic, but my take is that the metro board wants metro to be the cheapest/free-est public rail system. They don't necessarily want it to be the best. I doubt that we ever see world-class headways on metro, except for maybe the P3 projects that will be run by private companies. I agree with this. Metro is obsessed with free fares. They can then count homeless people riding all day as ridership, while working folk go back to their cars. Mike Bonin is leading the charge and he has basically done the same thing with parks in his council district. He has let the homeless move in and camp and trash the parks with some doing drugs and chopping bikes in the open, while regular folks, especially kids stay away. Reduced headways at night would be nice, but I doubt it would make much difference. I’ve never seen a train after a game at Staples overcrowded and while the platform there is small, there has always been enough room for people to jam in on it. It would be a lot more persuasive to argue for more trains and a bigger platform if they were actually over capacity. People won’t ride Metro mostly because they feel unsafe especially at night. There was just a murder at the Washington Station in the last couple of weeks. Earlier in the year there was a murder at the Pico/Staples Center Station. Women are consistently harassed and they often say no one comes to their aid. You have all the meth heads, tweakers, and mentally ill and people just feel it is every man for themselves and not worth it. |
|
